All notes for Subtopic 1301.01000 – In General
Decision | Description | PERC Vol. | PERC Index | Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
2506M | City of Madera 1301.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; CONTRACT BAR; In General MMBA employer’s local rules may, but need not, establish a reasonable contract bar that is consistent with the MMBA. Furthermore, irrespective of whether an MMBA employer’s local rules establish a contract bar, the rules may, but need not, establish reasonable limits on when a party may file a decertification petition even in the absence of an effective labor agreement. more or view all topics or full text. | 41 | 98 | 12/13/16 |
A465M | San Diego Metropolitan Transit System * * * PUC TRANSIT CASE. PERB DECISION NUMBER CONTAINS INCORRECT LETTERING, AS CASE DID NOT ARISE UNDER MMBA * * * 1301.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; CONTRACT BAR; In General Private sector law “shall apply” in deciding representation matters under the transit district acts (PERB Regulation 93080), though a transit district act takes precedence over federal law when there is a conflict. Under Crompton Company (1982) 260 NLRB 417, 418, a one-month CBA extension is not long enough to create a contract bar, because it is not long enough to create a new open window. Under Deluxe Metal Furniture Co. (1958) 121 NLRB 995, 999, fn 6, the contract bars applies only if both the contract ratification date and the contract’s effective date both precede the filing date of a petition to decertify or replace the incumbent union. more or view all topics or full text. | 43 | 11 | 06/12/18 |
2392C | San Bernardino County Superior Court 1301.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; CONTRACT BAR; In General The extension language in the parties’ MOU, which provided that the extension would expire on November 30, 2012, or when the parties reached a successor agreement if that occurred sooner, did not render the 2011-2012 MOU or its extension a contract of indefinite duration. PERB’s regulations do not supplant a lawful local rule for determining the window period for a decertification petition. more or view all topics or full text. | 39 | 52 | 09/26/14 |
A405E | Mount Diablo Unified School District 1301.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; CONTRACT BAR; In General The degree of notice to unit employees of the existence of the extension agreement was not relevant to determining whether the extension agreement was valid and barred the Teamsters’ petition. more or view all topics or full text. | 38 | 121 | 01/14/14 |
A385E | Compton Unified School District 1301.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; CONTRACT BAR; In General Severance petitions may only be filed during the appropriate “window period” established by Government Code sections 3544.1(c) and 3544.7(b)(1) which is less than 120 days, but more than 90 days, prior to the expiration of a lawful written agreement negotiated by the public employer and the exclusive representative. more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 151 | 10/18/10 |
1698M | City of San Rafael 1301.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; CONTRACT BAR; In General Board declined to depart from holding in City of Santa Barbara 125 Cal.App.3d 459, where court held that contract-bar doctrine is not incorporated within the MMBA. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 267 | 10/20/04 |
1678E | Delano Joint Union High School District 1301.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; CONTRACT BAR; In General Board dismissed request for recognition where employees at issue where found to be within existing classified unit and petition was not filed within proper window period. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 222 | 08/20/04 |
1622M | Westlands Water District 1301.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; CONTRACT BAR; In General Union alleged that District violated local rules by allowing unit modification election to proceed within 12 months of an unsuccessful decertification election. Board rejected union’s argument that a contract bar existed; instead, Board found that local rule provided a 12-month bar only from the date of formal recognition. However, Board found that separate local rule provided a 12-month bar following the date of any recognition election. Thus, Board reversed dismissal and remanded case for issuance of complaint. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 144 | 04/22/04 |
1581M | County of Sacramento 1301.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; CONTRACT BAR; In General The MMBA sets no maximum length for the term of an MOU and it contains no provision that establishes a contract bar as a limitation on the exercise of employee choice in the selection of an exclusive representative. The goal of a contract bar is to promote stability in labor-management relations while at the same time ensuring that employees retain free choice to remove or change an exclusive representative within some reasonable period. County ordinance provided a contract bar during entire term of agreement, but prohibited agreements with terms longer than three years. County improperly agreed to a five-year contract with union. Board held that under ordinance, a five-year contract might be binding on the parties but would not serve as an election bar at all. Board rejected County’s argument that contract bar should at least apply for first three years of five-year contract. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 57 | 01/09/04 |
A327M | City of Carson 1301.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; CONTRACT BAR; In General Since the City has de facto extended the principles of the contract bar doctrine to unit modification petitions by including open period requirements in Article II, Sections 8 and 10 of its Employer-Employee Relations Resolution (EERR), it is appropriate for the Board to rely on precedent from the NLRB and pertinent statutes under the Board’s jurisdiction to interpret Article II, Sections 8 and 10 of its EERR. more or view all topics or full text. | 27 | 88 | 06/20/03 |
A298E | Fall River Joint Unified School District 1301.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; CONTRACT BAR; In General PERB has held that an agreement must be in writing and signed, and contain substantial terms and conditions of employment in order to constitute a contract bar. A signed written agreement that incorporates all the provisions of the previous agreement and extends them which was signed before the end of the previous agreement's term does meet this test when there were no ground rules requiring unit or Board approval; p. 2, dismissal letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 23 | 30179 | 10/07/99 |
A261E | Capistrano Unified School District 1301.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; CONTRACT BAR; In General In deciding contract bar disputes, the Board has found that federal precedent under the NLRA provides significant guidance; p. 9. While the Board has not adopted the NLRB's contract bar rules in total, the Board has determined that it is appropriate to consider federal precedent and policy in interpreting contract bar statutes and regulations under the acts administered by PERB; p. 10. In developing its contract bar rules, the Board, like the NLRB, seeks a balance between the goal of fostering labor relations stability and the right of employees to freely choose their representative; p. 13. While the parties have made ratification a condition precedent to the effectiveness of the contract and ratification occurs, that ratification activates a contract bar to the filing of a decertification petition, regardless of whether the agreement had been signed by the parties prior to ratification. By this rule, the Board decertification petition, regardless of whether the agreement had been signed by the parties prior to ratification. By this rule, the Board effectiveness of a contract by express contractual provision; p. 14. Not only must an agreement be ratified, where required by express contractual provision, to serve as a contract bar, but a contract must also contain substantial terms and conditions of employment deemed sufficient to stabilize the bargaining relationship; it will not constitute a bar if it is limited to wages only, or to one or several provisions not deemed substantial; p. 14. more or view all topics or full text. | 18 | 25147 | 10/12/94 |
A204E | Inglewood Unified School District 1301.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; CONTRACT BAR; In General Successor contract did not act as bar to decertification petition where contract required ratification to be valid and petition filed prior to ratification; pp. 3-4, admin. determination. Order to Show Cause (OTSC); pp. 4-6. more or view all topics or full text. | 14 | 21073 | 03/28/90 |
A209E | Apple Valley Unified School District 1301.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; CONTRACT BAR; In General To act as a bar, contract need be ratified only if the parties agree, in ground rules or in the contract itself, that the contract is not effective until ratified; pp. 3, 6. Contract signed by chief negotiator may act as a bar even if not yet formally "accepted" by the district; pp. 3-4, 6. Initials of negotiators are sufficient to meet the requirement that, to act as a bar, a contract must be "signed"; pp. 9-11. Language of EERA section 3544.7(b)(1) requires that, to act as a bar, a contract must be long enough to create a window period (at least 120 days). Overrules Alum Rock No. Ad-158; "bright line" rule found to be mandated by statute will also serve to minimize potential for disputes and, consequently, avoid delay that harms fundamental employee rights and disrupts labor relations; pp. 9-11. relations; pp. 9-11. more or view all topics or full text. | 14 | 21121 | 06/14/90 |
A191S | State of California (Department of Personnel Administration) (California Union of Safety Employees and California State Peace Officers Association) 1301.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; CONTRACT BAR; In General Oral contract extension of indefinite duration did not act as a contract bar where PERB sets up test that it must be evinced by a writing, signed and contain substantial terms and conditions of employment, and be for a definite duration; pp. 6-9. A successor agreement which had not yet been ratified also was insufficient to constitute a contract bar because the MOU required ratification by union membership prior to its effectiveness; pp. 9-10. more or view all topics or full text. | 13 | 20174 | 08/24/89 |
A158E | Alum Rock Union Elementary School District * * * OVERRULED by Apple Valley Unified School District (1990) PERB Order No. Ad-209 1301.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; CONTRACT BAR; In General * * * OVERRULED ON OTHER GROUNDS by Apple Valley Unified School District (1990) PERB Order No. Ad-209. * * *Policy underlying contract bar rule is to promote stability in collective bargaining relationships and protect the right of employees to choose freely their exclusive representative; p. 6. (Overruled in Apple Valley USD (1990) PERB Order No. Ad-209.) more or view all topics or full text. | 10 | 17148 | 08/06/86 |
A106H | Regents of the University of California, University of California Los Angeles 1301.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; CONTRACT BAR; In General Parties with an interest in the result of a runoff election have no right to receive data about the number of ballots cast by department in the original election. Provision of such confidential data to interested parties could potentially be used to affect the result of the runoff election. more or view all topics or full text. | 5 | 12040 | 04/02/81 |
A097E | Downey Unified School District 1301.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; CONTRACT BAR; In General Appeal of finding that decertification petition was timely filed and not barred denied where new contract between the employer and the exclusive representative had not been ratified so as to activate its provisions, as required by ground rules agreed to by the parties at the time of the filing of the decertification petition; p. 3. more or view all topics or full text. | 4 | 11161 | 09/10/80 |
A050E | Taft Union High School District 1301.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; CONTRACT BAR; In General The certification and contract bars are not mutually exclusive. The two bars may operate in tandem to consume the 29-day statutory window period near the end of an existing contract. The purpose of the recognition, certification and contract bars is to promote an environment in which a rapport between the exclusive representative and the employer can develop free from the uncertainty and disruption of rival organizational activities. It is only during the first year of a new exclusive representative's tenure that these bars can overlap to freeze out an attempted decertification. more or view all topics or full text. | 3 | 10000 | 12/08/78 |
0348S | State of California (State Employees Trades Council) 1301.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; CONTRACT BAR; In General Rules of representation concerning window period will be strictly construed to promote stable employer-employee relations and thereby effectuate purposes of the act. more or view all topics or full text. | 7 | 14262 | 09/30/83 |
0327S | State of California (Department of Personnel Administration) 1301.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; CONTRACT BAR; In General Board will follow General Extrusion rule that contract will not bar an election if executed "prior to a substantial increase in personnel." No showing of substantial increase in this case. more or view all topics or full text. | 7 | 14200 | 07/14/83 |
0162E | Inglewood Unified School District 1301.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; CONTRACT BAR; In General Contractual term extending "to June 30" expires at midnight on June 29. Thus decertification petition was timely when filed on afternoon of June 30. Ratification of successor agreement on evening of June 30 did not provide protection of contract bar because of one-day gap between expiration of old agreement and ratification of new one. more or view all topics or full text. | 5 | 12056 | 05/12/81 |
0166E | Solano Community College District 1301.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; CONTRACT BAR; In General Protection of contract bar not lost for residual unit when incumbent exclusive representative agrees not to oppose timely petition for carve out of operations-support unit. Contract bar remains in effect for remainder of unit. more or view all topics or full text. | 5 | 12072 | 06/30/81 |